scholarly journals Trends of Formation of the Jurisprudence on Issues of the Special Part of the Criminal Code Enforced by the Practice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania

Teisė ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 117 ◽  
pp. 8-31
Author(s):  
Gintaras Švedas ◽  
Paulius Veršekys
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part

This article analyzes the decisions of the Senate of Supreme Court of Lithuania, the reviews of the Criminal Cases Division of this Court, as well as the rulings of the plenary sessions and the expanded panels of seven judges adopted until the 31st December 2019 and containing recommendations or new interpretations for provisions of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code or those adjusting the existing case law. The authors reveal the main tendencies of formation and change in recommendations and case law on the Special Part of the Criminal Code, as well as factors influencing these tendencies.

PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR SERIOUS CRIMES IN THE CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Police

The statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office on registered criminal offenses in the form of serious crimes for 2020 and 2021 were reviewed. Based on this, the number of serious crimes registered by the National Police of Ukraine during the reporting periods was determined. The provisions of the current Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No 7 of October 24, 2003 are analyzed, as well as some scientific positions of domestic scientists Knyzhenko O. O are taken into account. and Berezhnyuk V. M In addition, a review of the case law of the Supreme Court of Cassation on sentencing was studied. A thorough criminal-legal analysis of the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the part of punishments established for the category of serious crimes was carried out. Based on the analysis, it was determined which main and additional punishments are regulated in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the investigated category of crimes. The quantitative and qualitative indicator of sanctions for serious crimes has been determined, which include: imprisonment for a definite term; punishments alternative to imprisonment; additional penalties. Legislative and doctrinal provisions on punishments in the form of imprisonment for a definite term, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest are considered. The judicial practice of Ukraine in the part of certain issues related to the execution of a penalty in the form of a fine and the replacement of a penalty in the form of a fine with a penalty in the form of correctional labor is analyzed. It is established that the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in the sanctions of the articles, provides for the application to a person who has committed a serious crime, punishment in the form of imprisonment, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest - as the main punishment. The range of additional punishments is defined, which determine: confiscation of property, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities and a fine.

scholarly journals Criminal Law Violations in Labour Safety at Coal Mining Enterprises

2019 ◽  
Vol 105 ◽  
pp. 02018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yury Volgin ◽  
Irina Gaag ◽  
Alexander Naumov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Coal Mining ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Mining Industry ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Safety Rules

The paper deals with the qualification of criminal violations of safety rules in coal mining enterprises in the light of recent changes in Art. 216 and 217 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the adoption of a new Resolution of the Plenum of Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on violations of safety rules during operations. Firstly, the old and new editions of Art. 216 and 217 of the Criminal Code are compared. After that, the distinctive features of the articles under consideration are examined with the help of the new Plenum Resolution, federal laws and bylaws. Finally, the case law on this issue has been reviewed since 2016 with consideration of specific examples. In the paper, the authors do not address the issues of qualifying violations of safety rules at coal mining enterprises under Art.143 of the Criminal Code as it has not been changed. At the end of the study, the authors formulate the qualification rules taking into account the latest changes, without proposing any changes to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and other regulatory legal acts that do not include the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court, i.e. the results of the study can be used in practice. The problem is that there is a lack of research of the changes we are considering in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and even more in relation to the coal mining industry.

scholarly journals Problems of proving guilt in criminal cases in connection with tax evasion

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-176
Author(s):  
V. V. Dubrovin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The establishment of an intentional form of guilt and its specific type is mandatory for the implementation of the provisions of Art. 8 of the Criminal Code. In criminal proceedings in connection with tax evasion, a direct intent should be established in the act of the accused, otherwise the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 28, 2006 No. 64 “On the practice of criminal law on liability for tax offenses”. One of the proofs of direct intent in the act of the accused may be the decision of the tax authority to prosecute for the tax offense, made according to the results of tax control measures (in-house or on-site tax audits). In the event that it establishes an imprudent form of the taxpayer’s guilt in committing a tax offense, in proving the guilt of the accused in the course of criminal proceedings there may be an intractable contradiction.

scholarly journals The Perpetrator of the Crime in Complicity and without Complicity: A Universal Role in the Diversity of Legal Constructions

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107-122
Author(s):  
D. M. Molchanov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Element ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Sense

A comprehensive study of the perpetrator’s role leads to the following conclusions: “perpetrator of the crime” is a universal term used to describe an act that constitutes an objective element of the crime committed both in complicity and without complicity. Four alternatives to the actions of the perpetrator exist: executor who performed the objective element alone, an accomplice who performed the objective element with other accomplices, an indirect perpetrator, an indirect accomplice. Other ways to qualify person’s act as a perpetrator are based not on the law, but on the recommendations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation that de facto acquired the status of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (joint participation in the organized group, joint participation in a crime with “technical distribution of roles”). The main element of the act of the perpetrator includes the fulfillment of the objective element described in the disposition of the article of the Special Part. The content of the objective element of a particular crime does not depend on the existence of complicity, hence the term “perpetrator” is applicable to any crime and has a universal value. It is impractical to describe in the law the same acts in different terms. “Technical distribution of roles” is a doctrinal term. Its content is disclosed in some resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF. Extensive interpretation of the term “perpetrator” in crimes with “technical distribution of roles” is a forced measure on the part of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, since the term “the group of persons in conspiracy” is interpreted restrictively. This interpretation complicates the application of the criminal law and does not allow us to adequately assess the greater risk of crimes committed in complicity. The term “technical distribution of roles” does not have a universal (acknowledged) interpretation in jurisprudence, which also makes it difficult to apply the law. Joint participation in a legal sense in crimes committed by an organized group is a construct that is not based on law applied to crimes with a special subject, which contradicts part 4, Art. 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals A Gloss for the Judgement of the Supreme Court of 22 June 2017, File Ref. No. Iv Kk 189/17

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1 ENGLISH ONLINE VERSION) ◽  
pp. 167-176
Author(s):  
Sławomir Joachimiak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
The Relationship

In this gloss, the author offers a mostly favourable commentary on the content of the judgement of the Supreme Court of 22 June 2017, file ref. no. IV KK 189/17, which provides a backdrop for a discussion of the recent legislative changes made to Article 76 of the Criminal Code that formed the basis for the said judicial decision. The relationship between this provision and Article 108 of the Code is discussed in the context of the amendments, the doctrine and case law. The article also addresses the possibility of including a conditionally suspended custodial sentence in a concurrent sentence after the probation period is over and the expiry of the period referred to in Article 75 § 4 of the Criminal Code.

Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the Practice of the Courts’ Application of Legislation on Liability for Tax Crimes”: An Analysis of the Main Novels

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Igor O. Tkachev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article provides a critical analysis of a number of provisions of the Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the practice of the courts’ application of legislation on liability for tax crimes”. The author notes that the current version of the decree allows considering tax evasion as a formal crime. Thus, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation laid down the preconditions for classifying tax evasion as a continuing crime, which would significantly reduce the number of criminal cases terminated due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability. The author also draws attention to the refusal of the Supreme Court to define the category “concealment of funds or other property” for the purposes of applying Art. 199.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It is noted that such a refusal may lead to a broader interpretation by the courts of this criminal law norm.

scholarly journals Coercion or Extortion? (On the Problems of Delimiting Articles 179 and 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 32-38
Author(s):  
Viktor I. Gladkikh ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article discusses the issues of distinguishing two types of crimes: extortion (Article 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and coercion to complete a transaction or to refuse to complete it (Article 179 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the objective parties of which have a certain similarity, which gives rise to problems of qualification to take possession of the right to someone else’s property or commit other property actions. The practice of applying the norms in question is analyzed, the author points out the qualification errors in this kind of criminal cases, both at the stage of preliminary investigation and judicial examination. It is proposed to give an appropriate explanation of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Criminal law characteristics of unlawful acts in a bankruptcy of an individual who does not have the status of an entrepreneur

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-80
Author(s):  
Artem Nikolaevich Ryzhov
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Original Definition ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation

  The object of this research is public relations established within the framework of commission of unlawful actions in case of bankruptcy of a citizen (the Article 195 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The subject of this research is the norms set by the Article 195 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, Chapter X of Bankruptcy Act, case law, resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on bankruptcy of the citizens, scientific works on the topic. The goal of this article consists in formulation of the scientifically substantiated recommendations for improving criminal legislation provisions that establish responsibility for committing unlawful actions in case of bankruptcy of a citizen, as well as their practical implementation. The scientific novelty consists in differentiation of the unlawful actions in case of bankruptcy of a legal entity, individual entrepreneur, and a citizen who does not have the status of an individual entrepreneur, based on the fact that these actions impinge on various public relations. Unlawful actions in case of bankruptcy of a citizen are viewed as separate offence. An original definition of the direct object of unlawful actions in case of bankruptcy of a citizen is provided. In accordance with bankruptcy law and acts of its interpretation the author determines substantial differences between the content of constituent elements of the object, actions and circumstances of unlawful actions in case of bankruptcy of a citizen established by the Parts 1 and 3 of the Article 195 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the wrongful actions in case of bankruptcy of the legal entity. Specific recommendations are formulated on introducing amendments to the Part 2 of the Article 195 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Leaning on the analysis of statistical data and case law, the author concludes on the need for adopting a resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on criminal bankruptcies, the draft of which may take into account the results obtained in this research.  

Uporczywość jako znamię wykroczenia skarbowego z art. 57 § 1 k.k.s. – wybrane problemy interpretacyjne i dowodowe

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-76
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Marciniak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Time Basis ◽  
Special Circumstances

Article 57(1) of the Fiscal Criminal Code penalises a fiscal misdemeanour that consists in a taxpayer’s persistent failure to pay tax on time. The element of ‘persistence’ is subject to assessment, giving rise to many doubts and controversies. As regards the offences described in Articles 209(1), 218(1a) and 190a(1) of the Criminal Code, an objective-subjective understanding of that element is prevalent, which takes into account the prolonged nature and repeatability of conduct in question, as well as the perpetrator’s special, negative attitude to his obligation. It is emphasised, at the same time, that the persistence element is only established when the perpetrator has an objective possibility to fulfil his obligations. However, in its order of 28 November 2013, the Supreme Court adopted a partly different interpretation of ‘persistence’, according to which it may be indicated not only by the cyclic nature of the conduct, but also by a onetime, but prolonged, omission to pay a tax that is payable on a one-time basis. That interpretation has been criticised by many legal scholars. It is, nevertheless, frequently applied in the practice of the justice system. Following amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure, introduced by the Act of 27 September 2013 on amending the Code of Criminal Procedure and certain other acts, which came into force on 1 July 2015, evidence is taken, on principle, by the parties, after it is allowed by the division president or the court. The court may allow and take evidence exofficio only in exceptional cases justified by special circumstances. Currently, it is, therefore, the trial parties that are required to prove whether the ‘persistence’ element is present or absent. The amendment of the provisions concerned and the existing case law have induced the author to take up the issue in question.

scholarly journals Implementation Of Restorative Justice Approach In Legal Protection Against Lightweight Crime By The Children

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 943
Author(s):  
Rizky Adiyanzah Wicaksono ◽  
Sri Kusriyah Kusriyah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
And Control

Children who were doing mischief that led to the crime, should be against the law to account for his actions. Currently, prevention and control delinquency that resulted in minor criminal offenses is done through the implementation of the juvenile justice system to a restorative justice approach. The concept of restorative justice becomes a very important consideration in resolving criminal cases committed by children. The Supreme Court has issued a Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 2 of 2012 on the Limitation Adjustment light crime and the amount of penalties in the Criminal Code, which essentially stipulates that the value limit losses in tipiring (Lightweight Crime) case is a maximum of 2.5 million, and against the threat case maximum criminal penalty of three months imprisonment or fine, as well as in the settlement tipiring must promote Restorative Justice. Child settlement, which is directed to resolving informally or out of court, with the involvement of all parties involved in the criminal act has occurred. Minor criminal offenses committed by children under the Act No. 11 of 2012 carried through the diversion mechanism by way of mediation or deliberation.Keywords: Restorative Justice; Lightweight Crime; Children.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document